Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Beyond the read-only and idempotent annotations, the description discloses important behavioral boundaries: it returns descriptions and links rather than live figures, does not run lookups, does not inspect user inputs, and does not access wallets. These details materially help an agent avoid misusing the tool for dynamic or wallet-related queries.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two compact sentences, front-loads the resource being found, then immediately clarifies return behavior and exclusions. Every sentence adds useful selection or usage information without repetition.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a zero-parameter, read-only page index with an output schema and strong annotations, the description supplies everything an agent needs to select it correctly. It covers page categories, return nature, and important exclusions while leaving return-value structure to the output schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes no parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain; the baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4. The description appropriately focuses on scope and return behavior instead of inventing parameter guidance.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb, 'Find,' and a clearly scoped resource: public Zucoin, Splitchain, wallet, safety, ecosystem, statistics, and website-tool pages. It also clarifies the return type as page descriptions and links, which distinguishes it from article-oriented siblings like get_article and search_articles.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives clear context for when the tool is appropriate by describing the static page index it exposes, and it explicitly rules out live figures, lookups, input inspection, and wallet access. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives, so it falls short of full when/when-not/alternatives guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.